It is known what the modernized Russian economy should be like: it should become “innovative”, “efficient”, “competitive” and “socio-oriented”.

But this is only the wishes of economists. But does the economy itself want to become one? Has anyone asked her?

Meanwhile, the scientific methodology of economic analysis suggests a different path - not a list of what the Russian economy should become, but the study of the trends objectively inherent in it today, the prolongation of these trends and, on this basis, an assessment of the extent to which these trends can be corrected.

It is known that difficult, long-term and unsolvable problems are a constant companion Russian economy throughout the last centuries.

The first two decades of the new century were no exception in this regard.

What long-term trends can be seen in the current state of the Russian economy, trends that will objectively set the vectors of its inertial movement?

1. The industry of Russia will not be able to take a dominant position in the world economy for a very long time, since this requires something that is not given to it in any way - maximum efficiency. It follows from this that specialization in raw materials and the export of raw materials for this long period will remain the main source of economic development.

2. However, commodity markets are much more sensitive to market fluctuations than industrial markets. This means that the Russian economy, which remains oriented towards raw materials, will for a long time be dominated by economic factors beyond its control.

3. No “catch-up” economy is able to catch up with the leading countries without foreign investment from these countries, however, large international investors scouring the world markets in search of a niche for expanding their business prefer to stay away from Russia. What scares them off? Periodic massive capital outflows, dependence on barter deals, corruption of government officials, fear of organized crime.

4. The indecisiveness and inconsistency of economic policy aimed at ensuring equal conditions for market competition, protecting property rights, and eliminating administrative barriers to entrepreneurship, preserves the “pre-market” and even “anti-market” state of many areas, industries and sectors.

5. All attempts to create an effective state, performing the function of a guarantor of social, political and economic stability, are torpedoed 12 .

These problems give rise to the corresponding imperatives of the modernization stage of economic development. modern Russia 13 .

The economic characterization of the essence and consequences of globalization is very controversial. Nevertheless, any sane economist understands that resistance to the processes of globalization is fraught with extremely negative consequences for any national economy.

Equally contradictory is the characterization of the modernization of the Russian economy. Nevertheless, it is obvious to every economist that a slowdown in the modernization of the Russian economy is unacceptable.

However, the complexity of the modernization ahead of us lies in the fact that its “super task” is to implement the strict imperatives of globalization transformations. In other words, our future is directly dependent on how successfully the modernization of the Russian economy prepares it for participation in globalization processes.

But after all, almost all countries of the world have passed and are undergoing the same test. Therefore, it would be advisable to assess the globalization of the Russian economy, taking into account the historical experience of globalization modernization of the economies of other large countries of the world.

At first, globalization developed within the framework of the traditional model of the global division of labor:

The advanced economies ensured the free movement of capital (thus moving the areas of production activity to other regions) and the effective management of business on a global scale,

In "exchange" for the supply of raw materials, the production of semi-finished products and cheap low-skilled labor by the economies of developing countries.

Our country has managed to take a “unique” but uncompetitive position in this model, supplying cheap highly skilled labor.

However, in the first half of the 1990s, important changes took place - local corporations in the developing countries of Asia, Africa and South America began to form spatially new competitive areas of the "business environment". And it was globalization that contributed to this, providing free access to capital markets, inter-regional movement of production activities.

The globalization of the American economy has been accelerated by three exceptional features that have ensured the economic success of the United States until recent years.

The first feature is represented by the moment, the importance of which we economists do not always take into account in due measure - the historical fate of the United States has developed in such a way that mass optimism and social courage have been concentrated here for five centuries in a row. This was the result of a steady influx of millions of enterprising and industrious settlers.

From this follows the second feature - the concentration of world migration in the United States led to the fact that this country was initially aimed at globalization, since it represents disobedient citizens of almost every country in the world. In this sense, the United States is a model of global peace within the framework of one state. That is why the American economist Gabor Steingart was right to say that "multinational corporations were not an American invention, but they became its specialty."

The third feature is that the United States is the only state in the world whose citizens can engage in global commerce using their own national currency for this. But this means that domestic monetary policy is immediately transformed into global monetary policy. As the same Gabor Steingart aptly put it, the US dollar is “American blood that flows through the veins of the world economy” 14 . Almost half of all world commercial transactions are closed in US dollars, as well as two-thirds of all world currency reserves (Charles de Gaulle called this "exorbitant national preference").

Today, however, all three of these "strengths" are gradually turning into three "weaknesses" of the North American economy.

First, the Americans are "spoiled", so to speak, by centuries of victorious optimism. In the everyday economy, this manifests itself in the fact that the amount of public, private and corporate debt many times exceeds any allowable size. According to American researchers themselves, millions of households borrow so much money that they endanger their own future. The lower and middle classes have actually become disillusioned with putting aside any savings. They enter the 21st century as impoverished "third world" families.

Secondly, the globalization of the world economy by American efforts turned out to be a kind of "boomerang" - the United States promoted the international trade in consumer goods so much that it began to destroy their own local industry. Some sectors of socially profiled production (such as the furniture industry, consumer electronics, the production of auto parts, the manufacture of computers) “left” the country forever. It all ended with the fact that free trade brought the maximum benefit to the states competing with the United States, which now switched over to themselves most of the "global sector" of the domestic American market.

Thirdly, the situation with the dollar has also changed, which now does not strengthen, but weakens the US economy - so many dollars have been pumped into the world economy that now the collapse of the dollar can be caused by external forces.

Of course, at the start of the new century, the US is still a superpower. But it is already facing competition from outside and the difficulties it causes within the country. effects feedback globalization turned out to be negative for the American economy after global trade changed vectors - now American capitalists began to look for areas for more efficient capital investment.

As a result, direct foreign investment, which previously served to increase exports of American goods, became a factor in the displacement of production itself - in pursuit of cost reduction. There has been a redistribution of capital and labor - direct investment abroad is many times ahead of domestic investment. Thus, new jobs that should have increased family income in the US are already emerging outside the US.

The "golden age" of the American national economy - when the country provided prosperity for almost the entire population, provided the world with dollars and products, being the largest exporter in the world.

Today, economic energy has rushed in the opposite direction - the Asian, Latin American and European economies have become so strong that the world's largest exporter has become the world's largest importer, and the most important creditor has become the most important debtor.

Three important conclusions follow from what has been said.

1. In the course of modernization, our country must position itself as a new competitive spatial business environment.

2. Globalization factors eventually transform into anti-globalization factors, and they must be implemented before this happens.

3. It is necessary to take into account the historical experience of globalization of other national economies.

Several are currently known scenarios for the future development of the economy Russia. The most famous are those developed by the Center for Strategic Research and modified by the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation Forecast of the long-term socio-economic development of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2030 , and optimistic Scenario of socio-economic development of Russia until 2015 , prepared by the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences under the guidance of Academician L.I. Abalkin.

The best way to revive the Russian economy can only be provided by optimistic scenario. But its implementation requires a long-term, scientifically substantiated strategy of modernization and revival of the economy actively supported by both the business community and the public.

There is also a need for a more active, skillful and differentiated state regulation of socio-economic progress.

When determining the prospects for the development of the Russian economy, it is necessary to take into account the inevitability cyclic fluctuations indicators economic dynamics, periodic crisis phases of medium and long-term cycles.

Previously dominant and still in use today forecasting methodology does not take this into account the most important factor, especially tangible in the conditions of the predominance of market-capitalist relations in modern Russia and its active inclusion in the system of world capitalism.

Methodology for predicting cycles and crises developed by the Association "Forecasts and Cycles", the International N.D. Kondratiev Foundation, the Department of Cycles Research and Forecasting of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences.

Based on this methodology, one can roughly determine prospects for the development of the Russian economy in the first quarter of the 21st century.

The rhythm of medium-term cycles and crises is preserved when they change with approximately ten-year periodicity in the first years of the 21st century, in the early 10s and 20s. Actually global crisis unfolded in 2001. It has engulfed the leading countries and will lead to a short-term recession or slowdown in global economic growth.

This will have an impact on the economy Russia which is now included in world economy, especially if world prices for oil, Russia's main export commodity and source of foreign exchange earnings for a return external debt.

The prospects for Russia's economic growth in the next two decades may be adversely affected by the dynamics of long-term cycles, the transition of the fifth Kondratiev cycle that is now prevailing and adequate to it. technological order into a downward wave.

In this case, the rise phases of the medium-term cycles falling on it are smaller, and the crisis fall is deeper and longer. The effectiveness of new models and generations of equipment during this period is low, which limits the rate of economic growth.

Only in 20s21st century when expected upward wave of the sixth Kondratieff cycle, it is possible to accelerate the rate of economic growth and increase the efficiency of technological progress.

The position of Russia in this world rhythm depends on the chosen strategic path. If the current catch-up course, "holding positions" in innovation policy, the course of postponing technological breakthrough in the long term, then Russia will remain on the periphery of world progress.

Transition to the next Kondratiev cycle will be delayed, and the downward wave of the fifth cycle with its inherent deep crises will be especially painful. If a strategic course is adopted for "advanced" development, a technological breakthrough, for the preparation and priority development of generations of the sixth order, this may contribute to the implementation optimistic scenario the future of the Russian economy.

Russia is in focus crisis phase of the civilizational cycle. This phase is associated with transformation industrial economy in post-industrial, contradictory processes of globalization with the formation of the fourth generation of local civilizations and the deepening of their differentiation, with the formation of an integral socio-economic system, replacing both socialism and capitalism.

While not all the contours of the new system and world order are clear, there is a turbulent stream of changes. Russia as the core of the Eurasian civilization in the 90s went through a deep period civilizational crisis, rolled back on many positions.

More than one decade of intense, strategically focused activity is ahead in order - under an optimistic scenario - to regain worthy place in the global economic space.

Prospects for Economic Development: Russia and the World

The Russian economy after a sharp (deeper than in other segments) global economy) decline in 2008-2009. entered into growth mode at a rate of approximately 4% per year. What is the way further development should it choose: inertial or innovative? Read about it in this article.

The global crisis of 2007-2009

World crisis 2007-2009 (The "Great Recession" as opposed to the "Great Depression" of 1929) is usually explained as a failure in mortgage market and "deflation of the bubble" in the US real estate market. Distribution of various kinds financial innovation and loss of traffic control financial instruments in the American and global markets led to difficulties in country and international monetary systems and then to an economic downturn. To stimulate business activity, most developed countries increased government spending, including through the budget deficit and public debt. This contributed to a fragmented recovery of the world economy in 2010, but already in 2011 its growth slows down from about 5% in 2010 to less than 4% in 2011 and to about 3.5% in 2012 ( sl.2). At the same time, it should be borne in mind that in 2009 there was a fall in the world economy by 0.6%, so that its growth in 2010-2012. due to the very low “base” of 2008. It is significant that the decline in growth rates during this period is also accompanied by high inflation, which is accelerating from year to year (from 1.5%-2.0% in 2010 to 3%-4% in 2012).

Published indicators of consumer and producer expectations in the US and Europe make it possible to high probability argue that the economies of developed countries are waiting for a further slowdown. Laureate Nobel Prize in economics, Paul Krugman, in an interview with the Kommersant newspaper on September 9, said that there really was no recovery after the 2008 crisis. He noted that the policy of increased reduction of the budget deficit, which followed the pumping of liquidity into the economies in 2008-2009, slows down economic growth in both the US and Europe.

Many experts in our country and abroad, and I completely agree with them, come to the conclusion that the response to the crisis should not be increased intervention in the economy at the country and interstate levels, but deep structural reforms and a transition to a new growth model - “new normal".

For me personally, the main reason for such a conclusion is the explanation of the 2008 crisis not only and not so much by the processes that took place on financial market, and the lag of the world technological process from the global demand for resources. In the last quarter of the last and the beginning of this century, food prices (especially animal proteins) and hydrocarbons (oil, gas) have been growing exponentially all over the world. Thus, the market signaled to the world community that the demand for them sharply exceeds supply. At first, this signal seemed to be heard - the leading scientists of the world in 1972. signed the report of the so-called. Club of Rome "Limits to Growth". However, in real life, the additional income generated by high food and hydrocarbon prices was directed not to the development of new production technologies and improved efficiency in the use of scarce global resources, but to the expansion of the spectrum and increased consumption levels. To a large extent, especially in the 2000s, this was facilitated by the emergence and spread of derivatives and other financial instruments that made it possible to service the rapidly growing commodity turnover. But back in the 16th century, the Polish astronomer, economist and mathematician Nicolaus Copernicus and the English financier Thomas Gresham formulated an economic law stating: “Money artificially overvalued by the state forces out of circulation money artificially undervalued by it.” Or even simpler: "The worst money is crowding out the best money." Hence all those financial bubbles that burst in 2008.

Need for savings primary energy resources

Gradually global community is aware of the danger of ignoring the gap between demand and resource and technological capabilities. Behind last years According to the World Bank, energy consumption growth has slowed down sharply (Statistical Review of World Energy 2011).

In March 2011, the European Commission made very responsible decisions aimed at saving primary energy resources. In particular, it is planned that by 2030 more than half of all transportation of passengers and goods over a distance of more than 300 km will be carried out by water or rail, and by 2050 there should be no cars with gasoline and diesel engines in EU cities. Along with gas and hybrid engines for vehicles, the development of a hydrogen engine is being promoted in various countries. So this summer, Nissan Motor announced that over the next 5 years it will implement technological solutions that will make it possible to mass-produce a car with a hydrogen engine. According to Alexei Miller, Chairman of Gazprom (Vedomosti newspaper, December 16, 2010), today shale gas production has turned from a myth into one of the main directions of the energy strategy. In the US and Europe, the production and transportation of liquefied natural gas are becoming commonplace.

Despite the accident at Fukushima, Russia, the United States and Japan intend to actively use nuclear energy. Indeed, according to Nobel laureate in physics in 1997, now US Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, the development and implementation of new uranium technologies will require significant funds for more than 10 years (Vedomosti, 10.08.2011).

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), published in a report for 2010, global reserves of oil, gas and coal have stabilized, and demand for them will grow. Therefore, more and more funds are being invested all over the world in the development of renewable energy sources - water, wind, sun, geothermal energy. IN THE USA, European countries ah, Russia is developing new technologies for industrial and housing construction, focused on saving energy resources.

No less difficult problems are to be solved in the sphere of food supply. World prices for the most important foodstuffs (cereals, meat, milk, sugar, butter) by the beginning of 2011 broke all historical records, and their growth does not stop (report of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations - FAO). In another report, jointly by FAO and OECD, the world population in 2050 is estimated at 9 billion people and states that in order to feed them, food production will have to increase by 70% compared to 2005. That is why those gigantic investments, which in Lately went into the development of crop technologies, biotechnology and genetic engineering.

However, before the development of fundamental and applied science, investments in energy and energy saving, in the food complex will give a real return, a significant period of time will pass during which the world is waiting for "turbulent" development: slow growth, alternating with deceleration and recessions.

Government debt of the USA and Eurozone countries

In the United States, the public debt has almost equaled the annual volume of GDP, and the budget deficit has already turned from an economic into a serious political problem. With great difficulty, the recent decisions taken by President Obama and the US Congress to reduce this deficit by 3 trillion. dollars over 10 years, even in this long term, do not allow reaching an acceptable budget deficit of 3% of GDP.

In the Eurozone average level public debt in 2011 will be about 96%. At the same time, overcoming the budget deficit will require very tough and, of course, unpopular political decisions from a number of European countries and the monetary authorities of the eurozone. Suffice it to say that in countries such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal, even without taking into account interest payments in terms of public debt, balancing budgets will require 8-10% of GDP. The situation is not much better now in both Italy and Spain. I am not a supporter of those who are preparing for the funeral of the euro. I'm sure the European Central bank(ECB) and the European Parliament will take adequate measures to preserve the significant civilizational achievement - single currency. But, obviously, the European economy is waiting for difficult tests.

There is an overheating of the economies of developing countries and, above all, China. It is called by many the modern “driver” of global economic growth. Indeed, in terms of GDP, China is now in second place in the world. But in the economy of this country (as well as in the socio-political situation) very serious problems have accumulated. China's economy and, in particular, the real estate market is overheated, inflation is rising. The Chinese authorities, realizing the danger of the current situation, in 2009 and then in 2010 take decisions aimed at reducing economic growth to below 8%. At the same time, in 2010, China's GDP grew by 10.3%, while inflation was 6.4%, growth consumer prices for food 14.4%. Despite the increase in bank interest rates, lending volumes in China have grown by more than 15% this year. Obviously, the Chinese development model based on cheap labor force(the cost per person employed in China is less than 10% of that in the US), the replication of borrowed technologies and external demand (exports account for about 40% of the country's GDP) are close to their limit.

The current state of the Russian economy

The Russian economy has sufficient potential for progressive development. The country has 6% of the world's oil reserves, almost a quarter of the world's gas reserves, about 10% of water, 8% of arable land and 23% of the world's forests. With 2% of the world's population, Russia ranks 25th (out of 139) in terms of quantitative parameters of education (ahead of other BRIC countries), and in terms of the size of the domestic market - 8th in the world.

The Russian economy after a sharp (deeper than in other segments of the global economy) recession in 2008-2009. entered into growth mode at a rate of approximately 4% per year. In Russia, for a long time, there has been a very positive trend in many important fundamental macroeconomic characteristics. After a period of high inflation with a double-digit growth rate in 2001-2008. For the third year in a row, we have seen consumer price growth (December to December) noticeably below 10%. At the same time, in 2009-2011. The economy of our country is growing at a rate of about 4% per year. The level of external debt (about $35 billion) and public debt in general (about $150 billion or less than 10% of GDP), as well as the debt load of the Russian economy (corporate debt volume is about $500 billion with . maturities) now we have very low by today's world standards. The Central Bank's gold and foreign exchange reserves are about 550 billion dollars. deficit federal budget this year, according to data published by the Russian Ministry of Finance on October 3, will be less than 30 billion rubles, i.е. only 0.1% of GDP.

However, behind all this external well-being lie very, very serious problems that have been accumulating for more than one year and even more than one decade.

First of all, these are structural disproportions. The presence of our own natural resources has long turned from our competitive advantage in the world market into a brake on economic progress, making it possible for the domestic economy to be oriented towards raw materials. In the so-called "fat" years of the 2000s, the share of manufacturing industries in industrial production in our country not only did not increase, but even decreased. In 2010, the fuel and energy complex provided almost a third of the country's gross domestic product and about 40% of all tax and customs revenues to the budget. The share of the manufacturing industry in GDP in 2010 was only 15.3%. Exports from Russia are almost 75% provided by oil, gas, coal, metals and mineral fertilizers. At the same time, the country is practically dependent on the import of many consumer goods and foodstuffs, computers and office equipment, modern types of machinery and equipment.

Domestic enterprises are not competitive in foreign markets, as they do not own modern technologies. According to V. Inozemtsev, Russian companies not among the 200 global firms with the largest number of patents in 2010. In Russia, about 27,000 patent applications are filed per year, but 93% of them are filed with the Russian Patent Service. In the USA, where more than 50% of all world patents are registered, we send no more than 500 applications per year (Finland - 2600, Germany - 24900). As shown in HSE studies, the share of new (not only for our country, but also for the world market) products in the total production of Russian enterprises is 0.5% (in Finland - 27.2%, in Germany - 7.1% ). Labor productivity in our country lags behind its level in the US and other countries. developed countries, according to various estimates, 3-5 times.

As for macroeconomic stability, it also raises serious questions today. Recently the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation published scenarios for the dynamics of the Russian budget in 2012-2014. They clearly show that, excluding oil and gas revenues, the federal budget deficit will be 10% in the next three years. This means that all of our macroeconomic well-being is critically dependent on the price of hydrocarbons on the world market. The Ministry of Finance completed the so-called. budget stress test: what will happen if the price of oil in 2012-2014. it will turn out not to be $97-101 per barrel, as now included in the budget projections, but $61 per barrel, as oil cost in 2009. The answer is disappointing: the budget deficit will reach 4.2-5.2% and internal sources its funding will dry up. As for foreigners, their involvement in the Russian economy runs into very high institutional barriers. The expert group of the Government, working under the leadership of I. Shuvalov on the strategy of the country's socio-economic development until 2020 (the "Strategy 2020" group), considers the following to be the main of these barriers: insecurity of private property rights, unfair competition (often administrative resources replace innovations) , deviations from the rule of law and poor judiciary, high transaction costs.

The processes, factors and phenomena described above explain why, having significant competitive advantages(natural resources, intellectual potential) and even having achieved in 2001-2007. high rates of economic growth (about 7% on average per year), Russia is in the eighth ten in terms of GDP per capita: $15,100 per person (PPP).

At the same time, in recent years, differentiation in the standard of living of the population has not only not decreased, but even increased. The coefficient of funds (the ratio of 10% of the richest and 10% of the poorest) in the Russian Federation increased from 13.5 in 2001 to 17 in 2010 (data from the CIS Statistical Committee). Poverty rate (number of Russians with incomes below living wage) for five years, has not changed since 2006 and amounts to 13-15% of total strength population. This means that the growth that took place in these years cash income the poorest segments of the population, increasing pensions and social payments eaten away by inflation. As a result, in 2010, in our country, the richest 10% of people accounted for about 30% of the population's monetary income, while the poorest 10% accounted for less than 2%.

The quality of such social benefits as healthcare services (both paid and especially free), general and vocational education has only declined over the past 10 years. According to the general human development index, Russia, even after rapid economic growth in the 2000s, ranks 71st in the world (report of the Institute modern development- INSOR).

The result of this state of affairs is very sad. According to the VTsIOM, which in June of this year conducted a very representative survey of the population in 46 regions of the country, the number of Russians who want to emigrate has reached 21%. Most of all those wishing to leave the country are among people aged 18-24 - 39% and among highly educated respondents - 29%. Unfortunately, the process has already “started”: according to official data, more than 1.2 million people left Russia in 3 years, 40% of them higher education. As Sergei Stepashin, chairman of the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation, noted, 1,250,000 Russian scientists and specialists are currently working abroad.

Along with the loss of labor resources, Russia is also losing private capital. According to the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, the net outflow (excess of export over import) of capital from the private sector in 2010 amounted to 34 billion US dollars, and in the first half of the year current year- already 31.2 billion dollars.

Inertial path of development of the Russian economy

In this situation, the country will soon have to go through a fork, comparable in its significance to those that it passed at the end of the last - the beginning of this century. In the terminology of E.G. Yasin (see his report “Scenarios for the development of Russia in the long term”, NRU VGE, Moscow, 2011), we will inevitably have to make a choice between inertial, gradual development and decisive modernization of our entire socio-economic system.

In my opinion, the choice between inertial development and modernization is largely predetermined. In the case of inertial development, the sources of economic growth are: the first is the further exploitation of natural resources in the current regime; the second is a more complete use of labor potential with sluggish dynamics of labor productivity; the third is the expansion of the production apparatus through additional investment. All three of these sources are severely limited.

First. Without considering the entire spectrum of natural resources, we will name only two figures here. According to the latest calculations and the energy program of Russia, gas production in our country in 2011-2020. can grow at a rate of no more than 1.5% per year, and oil production over the same period can, at best, increase from 500 to 525 million tons, i.e. by 5%. Reducing the energy intensity of GDP by 40% by 2020 will require about 9.5 trillion. rubles of investments, including 8.8 trillion. rubles from extrabudgetary sources.

The second source- labor resources. According to the HSE, in terms of employment (63% aged 15-72) and annual working hours (1800 hours), we are at the level of the OECD countries and approximately 10% higher than the US level. To all appearances, we have essentially exhausted our reserves for building up labor resources.

Third source. In order to use it, it is necessary to significantly, by several percentage points, raise the share of savings in GDP and attract foreign investment into the domestic economy. But this is possible only under conditions of stable and long-term (more than 5 years) positive macroeconomic dynamics, improvement of the investment climate and, following them, an increase in business activity.

Thus, even a cursory analysis shows that the inertial scenario ensures only the maintenance of the achieved level of economic development without any significant economic growth. According to experts working on the government's program of socio-economic development for the period up to 2020, the inertial scenario will lead to the fact that Russia in the current decade may begin to stagnate along the lines of the Brezhnev era of stagnation.

In view of what has been said, it seems to me personally that a modernization scenario for our development is not only absolutely necessary, but also realistically possible.

Decisive modernization presupposes coordinated progress in three areas: politics, institutions, and the economy.

First direction- policy. It should be noted that in this direction, both before and after the events that took place on September 24 at the congress of United Russia, there are heated discussions. Not being a political scientist, I do not consider myself entitled to analyze this or that point of view. But as a Russian citizen and a person who managed to live in the USSR and work in the State Planning Committee, which was called the General Staff of the national economy, to participate in a radical economic reform In the 1990s, let me speak in favor of the version of political modernization advocated by such politicians, scientists and specialists as Auzan, Burbulis, Guriev, Dmitriev, Mau, Milov, Nemtsov, Oslon, Yasin and others.

In particular, Auzan, Guriev, Mau, who are members of the group of experts working on the government program "Strategy 2020", propose in the course of political modernization to move from state paternalism to social partnership based on the Social Contract.

E.G. Yasin, who is also involved in the preparation of the Strategy 2020, reasonably believes that there can be no economic competition without political competition. He proposes the following set of measures (the “liberal democracy package”): liquidation of the paternalistic regime; multi-party system; the rule of law; public control behind bureaucracy and business; decentralization and development of local self-government.

S. Guriev points out the risks of transition to such a political system in our country. Chief among them is the lack of interest in the reforms of the ruling elite. Another, no less significant: “The size of the Russian middle class is relatively small, the intellectual and business elite are even smaller, the rest do not risk starting their own business and do not support economic and political liberalization. Only 36% of Russians support democracy, and 28% support market reforms” (“Era of Changes.” Direct Investments, 2010, No. 12).

Second direction- modernization of institutions. Here the minimum required package includes: protection of property rights, fair competition, rule of law. When implementing it, however, it is necessary to take into account the consequences of the ownership structure that has developed in our economy today. “Due to the massive renationalization since 2004, state-owned companies have regained control of the commanding heights of the economy. Unlike private business, state-owned companies are not interested in the development of modern institutions” (S. Guriev).

And finally third direction- modernization of the economy. If we recall the Marxist terminology, then in the first two directions we talked about production relations, about the "superstructure". Here we are talking about the productive forces, about the "basis". It is in part of this direction in our country, and throughout the world, that there are very heated debates. Therefore, my position on the content of the modernization of the production apparatus of our economy is by no means indisputable. It is based on research carried out at the Gaidar Institute, at the State University Higher School of Economics, on the developments of JSC RUSNANO (see A. Chubais. “Construction innovative economy in Russia: an attempt to comprehend. Report at the conference "Russia and the World: Challenges of the New Decade". M., 23.01.2009; A. Chubais. "Russia - XXI: building an innovative economy"). The essence of this approach is as follows.

Based on the theory of long cycles by Nikolai Kondratiev, the fifth cycle is currently being completed, determined by the development of microelectronics, telecommunications, and pharmaceuticals. Today, most analysts believe that the next VI cycle will be based on the development of nanotechnologies and biotechnologies.

The need to modernize the socio-economic system of Russia

In the 2000s, the world is experiencing a nanotechnology boom. The Russian Federation in 2007, somewhat later than other countries, adopted its own nanotechnology initiative. It sets a very ambitious task to ensure in 2015 the production of nanotechnological products in our country in the amount of 900 billion rubles. In order to assess whether this is a lot or a little, I will say that today all innovative products in Russia are measured by a volume slightly larger than 1 trillion. rubles (Indicators of innovative activity: 2011. Statistical book, M., 2011).

Together with the publication of the presidential initiative, a State Corporation Rosnanotech. The main direction of its activity is the commercialization of developments in the field of nanotechnology, the creation of a nanoindustry in the country. Therefore, RUSNANO is not engaged in R&D (there is the Russian Academy of Sciences and other organizations for this), but actively finances the creation of enterprises producing nanotechnological products and the formation of the infrastructure of the domestic nanoindustry.

Today, the Corporation has created and debugged the technology of selection and financing investment projects. It includes scientific, technical and financial and economic expertise of these projects, organization of their financing and implementation. As shown on slide 17, since 2009 we have considered 2,037 applications, accepted for financing 128 projects with a budget of half a trillion rubles, and 68 of them are already being implemented.

Having ridden the IV nanotechnological wave and carried out a decisive modernization of the socio-economic system, Russia in the current decade can develop at a rate of at least 4% per year, ensuring a 1.5-fold increase in GDP by 2020.

In conclusion, I want to quote the words of E.T. Gaidar: “ We have indeed gone through the most difficult part, we have indeed solved the most difficult problems on the way to sustainable growth... Russia is by no means doomed to eternal poverty, to the miracle of eternal poverty in richest country. She can quickly start to catch up, because she has a powerful force, a powerful intellectual potential. Here you need to turn on one engine - the engine of interest ... Today, with the engine of interest turned on, I am convinced that Russia can perfectly move forward and become one of the leaders of the 21st century.”.

Whether Yegor Timurovich's hopes come true or not now depends on you and me, on the political will and determination of the Russian authorities.

Yakov Urinson

http:// gaidarfund. en/ public. php? id=94

Economists from the HSE Development Center analyzed the current economic condition countries and made forecasts for the near future.

What are prospects for the development of the Russian economy?

According to scientists, the opportunities for economic growth are currently exhausted.

Bad investment climate, despite moderately high oil prices, as well as a cooling in the political life of the country, do not contribute to the arrival of investors in Russia and lead to a deterioration in the economic situation.

It is possible that there are many problems ahead of us, including stagnation (or even), devaluation and worsening of the balance of payments.

Experts have proposed two most realistic scenarios for the development of the Russian economy, based on the estimated prices for "black gold".

Scenario No. 1 - oil prices will stay in the range of $90-$100 per barrel:

- due to the ongoing withdrawal of money from the country, even under the condition of stable oil prices, the economy of the Russian Federation in 2013. will decrease by 2.6%.
In subsequent years, the dynamics may be as follows: a slight economic growth in 2014 by 1.3% and a decline in 2015. by 0.7%.

- the growth of the industry will stop, and the trade turnover will decrease due to the outflow of capital from Russia (about 90 billion dollars a year) and the lack of investment, which in 2013. will decrease by 5.1% and will symbolically grow in 2014. by 0.3%.

– inaccessibility of loans for companies due to the growth of real interest rates.

- there will be a devaluation of the national currency: in 2013. the average exchange rate will be 32.5 rubles per dollar with a downward trend.

budget deficit in 2013 may amount to 0.3% of GDP, and by 2015. grow to 1.7% (according to the plans of the government of the Russian Federation - only 0.1% of GDP). The government will resort to active external and internal loans.

Scenario #2 – Oil prices will plummet.

Such an option is possible if the situation in the world economy as a whole worsens, Europe cannot get out of recession, and the United States cannot get out of stagnation.

Then there will be a repetition of the events of 2008-2009. and a sharp decline in commodity prices, including for Urals oil, to $70 per barrel in 2013. with some increase in 2014. up to $80 per barrel.

– contraction of the economy in 2013. by 5.6% and a slight increase in 2014. by 1.3% (protracted stagnation).

- weakening of the ruble by 20-25%, the dollar exchange rate will be 40 rubles in 2013. with the subsequent reduction of the Russian currency to 42 rubles by 2015.

– inflation growth to 8% in 2013, in 2015. – around 5%.

- the Russian government is actively spending reserve fund, which may be exhausted in 2013.

According to experts, Russia is completely unprepared for a global crisis (like the one that happened in 2008).

New released in October medium-term forecasts development of the Russian economy have become, at first glance, more positive, especially on the part of international organizations. However, the point here, apparently, is only in the difference in the forecast assumptions in terms of oil prices. At the same time, even against the background of predictive optimism, Russia will reduce its share in world GDP in the coming years.

We usually do not comment in detail on the forecasts of other organizations regarding the dynamics of the Russian economy. However, against the backdrop of a growing discussion about the prospects for the development of the Russian economy and a significant divergence of estimates, we decided to change this rule and try to better understand the logic of the arguments expressed by economic forecasters.

The new forecasts for the development of the world economy from the OECD and the IMF, which were released in September-October, show some deterioration in growth forecasts world GDP for the coming years compared with the estimates of the beginning and middle of the year (Table 1). This is mainly due to the influence of Brexit and the realization of the fact of the relative stability of the observed post-global financial crisis deceleration of world trade, which is explained by the slowdown in China that followed the crisis, the growth of protectionism and the weakening of demand growth in Europe. On the other hand, both the IMF and the OECD forecast global GDP growth rates in 2017 to be higher than in 2016: 3.2% and 3.4% against the expected 2.9% and 3.1% growth in 2016 respectively (Table 1). At the same time, although both organizations warn about the risks to financial institutions and financial stability associated with a prolonged period of low interest rates, they currently do not foresee a new global crisis in the coming years (the IMF gives its forecasts until 2021).

Summarizing the "package" of the IMF's new October reports on the state of the world economy, which traditionally includes the World Economic Outlook, Global Financial Stability Report and Fiscal Monitor, we can say that, according to this organization, short-term risks for developing countries in general over the past 6 months flattened as markets showed flexibility and ability to adapt to a large number shocks. The pressure on emerging markets has eased as prices for commodities have reversed and even risen. commodities, and also due to the fact that the expectations of a hard landing of the Chinese economy did not materialize.

At the same time, medium-term risks are increasing due to increased political instability in emerging markets and rising financial problems. Expectations for normalization monetary policy in advanced economies shifted further into the future, while weak growth and low interest rates increase pressure on banks, insurance companies and pension funds in both developed and developing countries. While most developed economies banking system generally sound, stable returns are questionable, reflecting unresolved structural issues and the need to change the business models used by banks. Corporate debt in many emerging markets has peaked with weak debt service capacity. These changes make it difficult to pursue a more balanced and stimulating policy and could lead to continued economic and financial stagnation. According to the IMF, the economic authorities of all countries should take a more comprehensive and thoughtful approach, seeking to protect and enhance financial stability and revive the global economy.

Based on such assessments and appeals, new forecasts for the development of the Russian economy are formed by the IMF, on the one hand, against the backdrop of growing long-term risks with a relatively stable current situation and oil prices, and on the other hand, they suggest that Russia monetary policy. As for oil prices, the IMF's base scenario provides for reaching the level of $50.6 per barrel. Brent oil in 2017 against $43 in 2016

In conditions where the point of view about the low probability of a new global crisis prevails (since there seems to be no overheating of the world economy that precedes it), forecasts for Russia by various organizations are determined mainly by an assessment of the dynamics of factors internal to the Russian economy. However, these forecasts are changing quite quickly. Thus, if in the first half of the year foreign experts spoke only about a slowdown in the recession in Russia in 2017, then most of the forecasts that came out later in their base scenarios already speak of a transition to growth next year. True, estimates of this growth vary from 0.4% with GDP growth in 2017 at the Center for Development Institute of the National Research University Higher School of Economics to 1.3% at the Fitch rating agency (Table 2).

At the same time, the actions of the Fitch rating agency, which recently adjusted the forecast for a number of Russian banks and long-term rating issuer default ratings (IDRs) for Russia as a whole (IDRs), assigning them a Stable level instead of Negative, which rating agencies have been setting the Russian economy for quite a long time. At the same time, the country rating ceiling still remains at BBB-, and the short-term national currency IDR remains at F3, which, as you know, are the last investment grade marks bordering on speculative. However, a change in the nature of the forecast to stable gives some hope for an improvement in positions or, at least, for maintaining the achieved level. At the same time, Fitch experts noted that an adequate and credible macroeconomic economic policy Russian monetary authorities in response to a sharp drop in oil prices.

One can also agree with the almost unanimous position of foreign experts that such factors as a flexible exchange rate, inflation targeting, and support for the financial sector have made it possible to keep the Russian economy from a severe recession and even outline steps for a gradual recovery. Especially, in the opinion of Fitch experts specifically, Russia's policy has stood out (in a positive sense) against the background of measures taken in other oil-exporting countries, which also depend on fluctuations in natural resource prices. However, in fairness, it should be noted that the trigger for these decisions was not only the decline in oil prices, but also the whole set of economic and political conditions and factors that determined the high degree of shock from which the Russian economy suffered in the past two years.

A positive sign that allows predicting the growth of the Russian economy after its decline observed at the end of 2014-2015, according to many experts, is the growth of international reserves by 8% in the first nine months of 2016. At the same time, the flexible exchange rate helped maintain the current account surplus and reduce capital outflows. At the same time, the same rating agency Fitch still expects the surplus to be lower in 2016 than in 2015 due to lower oil prices, i.e. will be about 2.3% of GDP against 5.2% in 2015, and in the future it will also grow slowly.

And yet, in our opinion, the difference in the assessments of the prospects for the Russian economy by Russian and foreign experts, which is clearly visible in Table 2, is explained not by the great skepticism of Russians about the economic policy being pursued and, moreover, its prospects, but by different forecast assumptions with in terms of oil prices. For the period up to 2018, they vary from $40 to $50 per barrel. (Table 1) (with the exception of Fitch, which, for obvious reasons, open access to his full forecast and its premises, apparently, does not provide).

At the same time, our hypothesis regarding the reason for the discrepancies in the forecasts for Russia by Russian and foreign experts looks very plausible, since the sensitivity of Russian GDP growth rates to changes (ceteris paribus) in oil prices is quite large and, according to some estimates, before the crisis was up to 0.175 p. .P. annual growth with a change in oil prices by $1 per barrel.9

In this regard, it makes sense Special attention turn not to the absolute figures of the forecast for Russia of the same IMF, but to the predicted dynamics of the Russian economy relative to other, primarily oil-oriented economies. This will allow a deeper understanding of the logic of this organization in assessing Russia's prospects.

Actual rates and forecast (according to the IMF) of GDP growth in oil-oriented economies and China, year-on-year growth, %

The new forecast for the development of the world economy and countries of the world from the IMF (World Economic Outlook) shows that the projected growth rates of Russia's GDP as a whole, although they are in the positive sphere (about 1.5% per year from 2019), however, they are obviously lower than many large oil-oriented economies, even those with much more high level GDP per capita (Norway and Canada), not to mention Kazakhstan, Nigeria and Saudi Arabia (Fig. 1). However, at the same time, the IMF is counting on Russia's success in fighting inflation, which, according to its estimates, should drop to 4% in 2018 and reach the average level for large "oil" economies, becoming significantly lower than in Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and Nigeria (Fig. 2).

Rice. 2. Actual rates and forecast (according to the IMF) of consumer inflation dynamics, at the end of the period, in %

At the same time, the Russian economy, according to the IMF forecast, achieves amazing success in reducing the deficit. state budget, which decreases from 3.9% of GDP in 2016 to 0.8% by 2018, outpacing most major oil economies in this parameter (with the exception of Norway and Azerbaijan) (Fig. 3). Against this background, the level public debt Russia is growing very slowly, increasing from 17.1% of GDP in 2016 to 19.1% in 2019. The IMF predicts such a low level of public debt from the oil economies only for Nigeria (Fig. 4), where the political situation is unstable, which a priori reduces its attractiveness as a reliable borrower.

Rice. 3. Actual level and forecast (according to the IMF) of the dynamics of the state budget deficit, in % of GDP

Fitch, in its recent report, also notes that, according to the medium-term tax strategy, a freeze is planned in Russia budget spending along with an increase in excise taxes (which is already in the plans for raising alcohol prices) and some other taxes. These and some other measures should lead to a reduction in the overall federal budget deficit to 1.5% of GDP in 2018 from 4% in 2016. Government debt is also projected to fall well below the Fitch BBB group's average forecast of 34%.

Rice. 4. Actual level and forecast (according to the IMF) of the dynamics of public debt (gross), in % of GDP

Against the backdrop of a forcedly tight monetary and thrifty fiscal policy in Russia, the IMF does not assume that the Russian authorities will be able to quickly use institutional factors to accelerate economic growth. Despite the fact that in 2017-2021. savings will exceed gross savings by 3.5-4% of GDP, the share of the latter in GDP in 2018 will be only 22.4%, and will approach the level of 24% only in 2021 (Fig. 5). Such a level of investment activity among the oil economies will be characteristic only of prosperous Canada, which has already built almost everything, and it will be noticeably lower in the forecast period only in Azerbaijan and Nigeria.

It is not surprising that with weak investment activity, net exports, which, against the backdrop of the past devaluation, could spur Russian GDP growth, will also not grow, according to the IMF. Moreover, the growth of physical volumes of imports in some years will even outpace the growth of exports in real terms (Fig. 5), and the rates of the latter (1-3% per year) will be at the average level for oil-oriented economies, clearly lagging behind the forecast estimates for Kazakhstan and Nigeria. At the same time, even against the backdrop of weak export dynamics, the current account in the Russian economy will be at a quite favorable level (3.9% of GDP in 2018, 4.4% in 2021), only slightly lower than in 2007 when it was 5.2% of GDP (Fig. 5). This predicts relative stability and exchange rate ruble. In general, look at the IMF forecast, and it turns out peace and quiet. At the same time, “essentially” claims to these forecasts can only be made from the point of view of overestimated forecast oil prices and, accordingly, overestimation of the current account and the stability of the ruble exchange rate.

However, it should be clearly understood that, judging by the current forecasts of international organizations, even after emerging from the recession in 2017, the Russian economy will grow sluggishly, at a rate 2.5-3 times lower than world economy generally. This will negatively affect the standard of living and moods of the population, negatively affect the mood of investors and reduce the opportunities for accumulating human capital and strengthening the country's position in the world.

Will it be possible to make the forecasts of the Russian economy become not only reassuring, but also attention-grabbing? economic growth providing opportunities for modernizing the economy and society? Time will show.